Latest Articles

During Women’s History Month, it’s important to take the time to honor women leaders who have paved the way for our present-day success. I also want to mark the occasion by looking forward to a time where women and men will share equally in STEM degrees and jobs – and in inventing.

In order to increase the proportion of women who hold patents, we need to raise the numbers of women achieving degrees in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM). I’m deeply passionate about this issue, and I speak to young girls around the country each year to encourage them to pursue their interests in these areas. When I meet these girls, I seek to bust the myth that women are anything but extraordinarily capable when it comes to STEM.

At Intellectual Ventures we believe in the transformational power of novel ideas, and that such ideas can catalyze meaningful progress and represent true, lasting value. We believe this value can be realized in a multitude of forms and is shaped by the vision and aspirations of not only the creators of ideas, but also of those who understand their value.

Earlier this month we entered into a long-term partnership with emerging audio analytics technology startup Yactraq, a company defined by their boot-strapping, entrepreneurial spirit.

Last summer, I watched with the same horror many felt as reports from West Africa emerged of Ebola’s deadly toll. The virus has devastated families, wreaked havoc on health systems and savaged economies.
But to be frank, I’m much more worried that next time – and there will be a next time – it will be far worse.

Today, Bill Gates makes the case at both TED and in the New England Journal of Medicine that if Ebola has taught us anything, it is how dangerously unprepared we are to deal with a global epidemic. As he so aptly describes the world’s response to Ebola in the New York Times, “The problem isn’t so much that the system didn’t work well enough. The problem is that we hardly have a system at all.”

In an essay I published in 2013 in Lawfare, I raised similar questions about our national security – but in the context of a strategic biological attack. Many of the preventative measures we could take to improve our institutional and infrastructural defenses against bioterrorism are the same ones that would save lives in the event of a pandemic or an emergent pathogen. Antiviral drug research and development, monitoring systems for detecting outbreaks early or coordinated emergency response protocols to name but a few.

Because the next time it might not be Ebola. It might be a new disease like SARS or MERS. Or it might be a strain of flu like the 1918 Spanish Influenza Pandemic. Instead of thousands of deaths, millions, or even hundreds of millions of lives could hang in the balance.

This helps explains in part why Intellectual Ventures has been hard at work on a number of outbreak- related projects over the last six months. Small measures to be certain, but ones I am proud to see contribute to the scientific research whole:

The Institute for Disease Modelling (IDM) supported the Ebola response with data-driven analysis of the sub-national patterns of the virus’ spread in West Africa. By illustrating at a district-level were Ebola was increasing, decreasing, and plateauing over time, the data IDM shared with global health partners assisted in planning Ebola responses by the areas that would face an increased burden in the weeks ahead.

Global Good has deployed an ice vest that has helped Ebola health workers spend more time with their patients, with less risk of infection to themselves. We built up this expertise by evaluating hundreds of personal cooling solutions ourselves, and working directly with medical experts to understand what would work best for healthcare workers within the constraints of the Ebola Treatment Centers in West Africa. Since October 2014, IV has deployed over 1,000 personal cooling systems (enough to supply the priority locations) at Ebola Treatment Centers and hospitals in Guinea, Sierra Leone, and Liberia, where the need and case counts were the highest.

Global Good is supporting clinical trials led by the World Health Organization and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Ebola-affected countries, with a modified version of our passive vaccine storage device, called the Arktek. Maintaining the “cold chain” at extremely low temperatures is essential to keeping vaccines safe and effective, especially in areas without reliable electricity supply.

I do not profess to be an expert in defense, let alone global health. But I will happily be accused of being a technological optimist. I share with Bill an unwavering belief in human ingenuity. I believe we will invent our way out of these problems, as we have done in so many cases before.

But that’s also why we should so listen closely to Bill’s call to action: we need a global warning and response system for outbreaks.

Because Ebola is a tragedy, but it could very well have been a catastrophe.

Meet Dr. Grace Huynh, a senior research scientist at the Institute for Disease Modeling, part of Intellectual Ventures’ Global Good initiative. Grace focuses on tuberculosis modeling in close collaboration with international philanthropy organizations and government agencies to find novel solutions to fight some of the world’s toughest diseases.
Here are some of her reflections:

On the impact of her research:

“At the Institute for Disease Modeling, we support policymaking in everything from TB to HIV, malaria, and polio. Our ideas help develop new statistical modeling to monitor how infections and rates of infection change over time.”

“Our research creates opportunities to deliver targeted therapies on an individual level, but also improves healthcare broadly. Healthcare is not the same for everyone, and not all interventions are effective in all countries. One country’s population might need radically different delivery systems than another. So [the Institute for Disease Modeling] works to determine the best solutions by analyzing the entire healthcare ecosystem.”

Intellectual Ventures recognizes the similarly amazing contributions that women make in invention and innovation. During Women’s History Month, IV is honoring a few of the many women inventors whose work strengthens businesses, leads to economic development, and improves society as a whole.

Though her work was never patented, Rear Admiral Dr. Grace Hopper played a key role in developing computer software. She worked on one of the world’s first computers, the Mark-1 at Harvard University, coined the terms “bug” and “debugging,” and developed the first concept of a compiler, a way to translate computer code between different languages.

In 1965, Stephanie Kwolek made a breakthrough in her lab at DuPont when she invented the synthetic fibers used in Kevlar. Ever since, body armor around the world has relied on Kevlar due to its formidable strength.

When Katherine Blodgett got her job at 19 with GE’s Research Laboratory, she became the first female scientist to work for the lab.

In 1938, Blodgett received a patent for inventing the world’s first truly clear glass. The monumental invention paved the way for countless applications – eyeglasses, telescopes, cameras, projectors, and microscopes all are possible due to Blodgett’s work.

In 1974 and at age 12, Becky Schroeder received a patent for her glow-in-the-dark paper invention. The “Glo-sheet” received significant demand from doctors, photographers, and EMTs – anyone who needed to write on paper in the dark.

Schroeder holds the title as the youngest woman to ever receive a patent. To develop her invention, she experimented with phosphorescence paint on papers and clipboards after trying to complete her homework in the car after dusk one evening, proving that anyone of any age can have a breakthrough idea.

The latest study purporting to shine a light on patents and the invention economy is a survey conducted by UC Berkeley’s Robin Feldman and Stanford’s Mark Lemley. We’ve been pointing out for years that sound data supporting the need for further changes to patent enforceability is lacking, so we were curious to see what these two academics might say about patent licensing and its relationship to innovation.

In their new study, professors Feldman and Lemley raise a very interesting question -- whether society benefits by providing exclusive rights to an inventor when, in many circumstances, a second inventor would likely have come up with the same invention independently.

While this is an interesting thought experiment worthy of serious academic debate, in the United States our patent system is constitutionally charged with “securing for limited times to…inventors the exclusive right to their…discoveries.” Put another way, our patent system has been designed to reward inventors by granting them the exclusive rights to their inventions.

Because of this, asking a small group of lawyers whether paying for the use of an invention – after it’s already been infringed – results in additional innovation, clouds, rather than clarifies, the issue. The issue becomes especially clouded when the researchers only receive 188 responses from 10,000 queries, and many of the responses come from members of the Internet Association, CCIA and Coalition for Patent Fairness – all of which are zealous advocates for legislation that undermines patent enforceability.

Since a patent is not a right to practice, it is does not make sense to suggest that (or study whether) providing a license to an infringer would promote innovation at the infringing company. It should not be a surprise to anyone that the primary benefit to a licensee already practicing the patent is “freedom to operate” – that’s all a patent owner, who only owns a right to exclude, is able to provide an infringer.

In the current system, it is the promise of the right to exclude that is intended to promote innovation – by the inventor, not by the infringer, and with that system in place the United States has been a technological leader for decades. For instance, a recent paper from Professor Arthur Diamond at the University of Nebraska at Omaha analyzes our current system and makes the case that patents not only incent inventors to invent, but also often provide the funds to enable entrepreneurs to turn inventions into innovations.

And, a new study from Stanford professor Stephen Haber not only supports some of Professor Diamond’s assertions, but it also directly contradicts professors Lemley and Feldman by showing that patent licensors play “a useful intermediary role between individual inventors and large manufacturers.”

While these esteemed academics have radically different views on whether patents and patent licensing promote innovation, the fact remains that our patent system is at the heart of our innovation economy. So I’d propose another thought experiment that gets the heart of the issue: is there any other tech economy in the world Professors Lemley and Feldman would like to swap for that of the US?

To be clear, Intellectual Ventures has for years been a supporter of legislation that will truly improve the patent system. But the study from professors Lemley and Feldman asks the wrong questions to the wrong people. It sets up, and then knocks down, a straw man argument, and fails to add meaningfully to the debate.

Universities are innovation powerhouses. Armed with some of the world’s brightest minds—and with direct access to the next generation of scientists and technologists—they’re able to focus talent to develop solutions to a broad scope of challenges.

From building new centers to awarding grants in key areas, this week’s News You Can Use includes stories about how universities around the country are investing in invention.

Recognizing the important contributions that students make to invention, the Lemelson Foundation gifted MIT $1 million to support programs that teach students key skills necessary for successful innovation and entrepreneurship.

This week on Behind the Breakthrough, we’re profiling Jake Russell, a member of Intellectual Ventures’ Invention Development Fund. While he usually focuses on software development and innovative computer algorithms, he also applies the process of invention to his passion for cars and racing.

Photo: Jake Russell and his daughter.

Jake works as an Invention Development Manager at Intellectual Ventures. In the past, his breakthrough inventions in software development provided JPEG2000 software products and services for the Geographic Information Systems (GIS) industry.

Here are some of his reflections:

On the process of invention:
“When I think of an invention, I usually start with an important problem and work toward a solution. But effective inventing isn’t about coming up with just any solution; it’s about finding one that’s both useful and practical. Trying to conceive an invention that’s useful and practical in the future can make you want to look into a crystal ball.”

It’s an important time in the transportation industry as the consumer depends on technology to stay connected with their professional and social networks. This dependency is driving consumer electronics, connectivity, and information technologies rapidly to converge in automotive and other transportation industries. Automotive companies are finding the need to maintain access to a wide array of relevant patents, not traditionally available in the automotive space.

That’s why we are so pleased that Ford Motor Company signed a license agreement with Intellectual Ventures (IV). The deal provides Ford and its affiliates with a license to IV's patent portfolio of approximately 40,000 current IP assets in addition to future IV assets that may be acquired during the license term. IV offers an efficient way to access the invention rights companies need to drive innovation within the market.

Intellectual property development and protection is a global enterprise, and more and more countries are viewing IP as a critical asset to their economies. Global buy-in on the importance of IP is moving governments to incentivize inventors to find cutting-edge solutions to today’s most pressing challenges.

As countries prioritize intellectual property development, the value of collaboration is becoming increasingly evident, and engagement in the IP landscape is making cross-border cooperation easier. September’s BOAO Forum for Asia in Seattle, where IV founder and CTO Edward Jung spoke about the global benefits from Asia’s invention boom, offered one such opportunity to learn from executives and innovators from Asia and hear about ways they are approaching the world’s most challenging problems.

Prioritizing invention—and strengthening the IP marketplace—also increases the number of people globally who can devote time to addressing systemic issues facing the developing world. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory recently released a study identifying the “top-50 critical scientific and technological breakthroughs required for sustainable global development,” which highlighted innovations in desalination technology, smartphones, education resources, energy sources, and fertilizers, among others.